2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[pgfpro]

I believe that my old "shortcut" of 17.5 Hp per 1000 cc, Bar absolute and 1000 Rpm works pretty well here?

Comparison with pgfpro's numbers above; 1600 cc, 1.9 Bar and 12500 Rpm would mean 665Hp vs his 692?

Nice short cut. Its always cool to see there a few different ways to get there.

[xpensive]

I think we all agree that 10500-12000 is useable

what I'm saying is will they design for 10500-12000 ?
or 13200-15000 ?
or 14100-16000 ?

very different boosts and CRs

Trying to think now after a six-pack and then some, mass- and energy-flow obviously being the same with the same output, regardless of Rpm, but will volumetric-flow be the same still?

[pgfpro]

I think we all agree that 10500-12000 is useable

what I'm saying is will they design for 10500-12000 ?
or 13200-15000 ?
or 14100-16000 ?

very different boosts and CRs

Trying to think now after a six-pack and then some, mass- and energy-flow obviously being the same with the same output, regardless of Rpm, but will volumetric-flow be the same still?

VE will drop off after a certain rpm based on the engine design.

When VE decreases the engines air flow numbers decrease. But in the case of a turbo engine all you have to do is increase the boost to make up for the lost flow.

As example the new F1 engines at 17psi intake will be flowing around 46lbs/min of air at 100% VE at 10500rpm.
Drop the VE to 80% at 10500rpm the engine will now be at 37lbs/min. To get back to the 46 lbs/min you need to increase the boost to 25.5psi. At both points the fuel use will stay the same.

[pgfpro]

Sorry guys I think I made the wrong assumption on the turbo will be able to generate more electricity at a higher rpm. I did some edits on my last post about this.

After running a bunch of numbers thru my spreadsheet and BW turbo sim. I now think that at lower rpm range there will be opportunity to make more electricity on the turbo's generator due to the higher engine delta pressure. As the turbo's generator puts more load on the turbine this will create more back pressure.

Here is Borg Warner Match Bot with my F1 inputs
Required Inputs


http://www.turbodriven.com//performance ... rsin=92044&

[vlado09]

will the engine still frozen in 2014?

[mx_tifoso]

Afaik there hasn't been any news about how development will be run on the next engine.

But for now Renault Sport are on the right track with the new engine, as per Rob White:
"We have now run a V6 and the programme is more or less in line with our planning. Our intent is to be ’race intent’ in the course of 2013."

[Tommy Cookers]

...........at lower rpm range there will be opportunity to make more electricity on the turbo's generator due to the higher engine delta pressure. As the turbo's generator puts more load on the turbine this will create more back pressure.

the unprecedented new rules dictate reducing the air delivery per rev (charge) as the rpm increases beyond 10500

running with a rpm-varying electrical load from the GUH onto the turbine would slow the turbo and raise the exhaust pressure ('back pressure') above the turbine, both effects contribute to the required reduction in charge
ideally this load variation would maintain a relatively constant boost with rpm rise, the charge being largely managed by increasing back pressure governed by electrical load
(relatively constant boost makes best use of the piston expansion ratio)
(there is no need for wastegating ?)

the rather high back pressure will somewhat reduce the large pressure losses (pre-turbine) that occur even in a turbo engine
ie the turbine will use some exhaust energy unavailable at low back pressure
(these are losses caused by the near-unrestricted expansion of gas on release from the cylinders)

so generating some genuinely free electrical power for direct (immediate) use by the MUK ie some electric compounding
this potentially allows nominally full-time e compounding (is there any limit apart from the 120KW electrical power limit ?)

any practical approach requires a small rpm range ie full use of the standard gearbox (and some margin for short-shifting)
the small rpm range is suited to the usual fixed geometry tuned length induction & exhaust systems

with this approach the gearbox rules enable the driver to run electrically or not, 'non-actively' just by gear selection
(eg run full rpm range accelerating, then run high gear lower than full range rpm on straight)

we could design '12k' or '14k' engines, ie design for 11100 - 13000 rpm normal range or to 12900 - 15000 rpm normal range
(the 12k engine needs higher boost/turbocharging capacity, and has a lower piston CR/ER but also lower frictional losses)

the turbine must have capacity to drive the electrical load simultaneously
the electrical loading could easily lower the boost with rpm rise (by slowing the turbo), but this is to be minimised
(to maximise expansion in the cylinder at all rpm)

IMO what's not to like ?

[pgfpro]

...........at lower rpm range there will be opportunity to make more electricity on the turbo's generator due to the higher engine delta pressure. As the turbo's generator puts more load on the turbine this will create more back pressure.

the unprecedented new rules dictate reducing the air delivery per rev (charge) as the rpm increases beyond 10500

running with a rpm-varying electrical load from the GUH onto the turbine would slow the turbo and raise the exhaust pressure ('back pressure') above the turbine, both effects contribute to the required reduction in charge
ideally this load variation would maintain a relatively constant boost with rpm rise, the charge being largely managed by increasing back pressure governed by electrical load
(relatively constant boost makes best use of the piston expansion ratio)
(there is no need for wastegating ?)

the rather high back pressure will somewhat reduce the large pressure losses (pre-turbine) that occur even in a turbo engine
ie the turbine will use some exhaust energy unavailable at low back pressure
(these are losses caused by the near-unrestricted expansion of gas on release from the cylinders)

so generating some genuinely free electrical power for direct (immediate) use by the MUK ie some electric compounding
this potentially allows nominally full-time e compounding (is there any limit apart from the 120KW electrical power limit ?)

any practical approach requires a small rpm range ie full use of the standard gearbox (and some margin for short-shifting)
the small rpm range is suited to the usual fixed geometry tuned length induction & exhaust systems

with this approach the gearbox rules enable the driver to run electrically or not, 'non-actively' just by gear selection
(eg run full rpm range accelerating, then run high gear lower than full range rpm on straight)

we could design '12k' or '14k' engines, ie design for 11100 - 13000 rpm normal range or to 12900 - 15000 rpm normal range
(the 12k engine needs higher boost/turbocharging capacity, and has a lower piston CR/ER but also lower frictional losses)

the turbine must have capacity to drive the electrical load simultaneously
the electrical loading could easily lower the boost with rpm rise (by slowing the turbo), but this is to be minimised
(to maximise expansion in the cylinder at all rpm)

IMO what's not to like ?

Tom I'm not avoiding your last post. I'm in some deep thought and trying to put all these pieces together. lol

One part I'm leaving behind until I get the general part of this equation is the fact what happens when the extra 120kW is thrown at it. This is where it really gets confusing for me. I think it needs to be address now???

[aero expert 807]

Any news on when the first engines should be tested on the track?
My guess would be just before the 2013 season.

[aussiegman]

Renault, Ferrari and Mercedes have already begun dyno tests of their new 2012 units.

AFAIK, only Renault has been through to have actually run one out of the test cell.

[aero expert 807]

By the way, how much boost can the teams run?
Are there any regulations dictating how much boost pressure is allowed?

[Dragonfly]

With fixed max. fuel flow they will limit the boost themselves without explicitly fixed margin.

[aero expert 807]

With fixed max. fuel flow they will limit the boost themselves without explicitly fixed margin.

Your probably right.
My guess would be around 1 bar

[adam2003]

Will mclaren still have Mercedes engines in 2014?

[skgoa]

Whitmarsh has said so but IIRC they don't have a contract past 2013, yet.